PaulPowersTash
Player Valuation: £15m
Not surprising... But it’s frightening how close we are to them getting what they want
Ahhh...
The Guardian (of all newspapers!) quoting an academic who lectures in sociology?
Must be 100% true and accurate then
Not surprising... But it’s frightening how close we are to them getting what they want
Ahhh...
The Guardian (of all newspapers!) quoting an academic who lectures in sociology?
Must be 100% true and accurate then![]()
Pro-brexit member not engaging with substance and dismissing argument with an ad hominemAhhh...
The Guardian (of all newspapers!) quoting an academic who lectures in sociology?
Must be 100% true and accurate then![]()

Because the British people are gullible and thick, way too open to manipulation.And yet the approval rating of Corbyn as a leader has been way below that of Johnson (and indeed May), which given how awful both have been might have given some pause for thought, except the Corbynites see no ill in their hero and hang to this notion that purdah will right all wrongs and give their plucky champ the fair crack he's been denied all this time.
You'll see how effective 'Johnson cant be trusted' is when people vote in a GE and they have the chance of backing a serial liar who promises them jam tomorrow.No it isn't. I'm not sure the majority of the public consider the difference. Most people do not concern themselves with nuance of politics, they go for headline and soundbite.
The 'PM is a bigger liar than us' and 'trist us, we are slightly more trust worthy than him' just isn't cutting it I'm afraid.
The only way it gets attention or traction is if opposition MPs, in every single interview, absolutely hammer the detail of every point and refuse to move onto anything further unless it's factual; it invites the interviewer to facilitate and press further which is problematic for a campaign built on 'Brexit means Brexit' because it's completely devoid of detail or meaning. If the interviewer is complicit or doesn't facilitate properly, then expose it as false or misleading and refuse to answer until the acknowledgement comes. But it relies on being incredibly well briefed and disciplined - which, unfortunately is not always evident in those chosen to represent the Labour Party in media appearances.
The other alternative is something like 'Brexit means Brexit' which can just be repeated ad nauseum until it becomes truth.
All you need to do @davek is to read Tom Bower's book about how Corbyn is really the cookie monster and you will see the light. lol lol lolBecause the British people are gullible and thick, way too open to manipulation.
The mentality of my fellow countrymen and women is deteriorating to the level of South Sea Islanders who worship sea Gods and the like.
Pro-brexit member not engaging with substance and dismissing argument with an ad hominem![]()

It's just a private jibe that @Walken is familiar with jokingly.....What does that even mean? Garbage
Ahhh...
The Guardian (of all newspapers!) quoting an academic who lectures in sociology?
Must be 100% true and accurate then![]()
The fact you both can't see how this could be the case is enough for me not to invest anytime worrying about the validity of my argument. Because like I wrote, the Corbyn supporters can't see any wrongdoings in their eyes.
Of course Cameron started this by calling the referendum to try and heal a divided Tory party, but the weakness of the Corbyn led Labour party has allowed everything since. If he is so convinced by a customs union/single market access now then he should have campaigned for remain at the referendum. It could and should have made a difference to Labour leave voters if he had personally reached out to them and made it clear what would happen to jobs and security at that point. However he was as aloof as he could be during that campaign. To give him his dues recently he has been on point, a day late and a dollar short springs to mind though.
He did, though. This idea that he didn’t do anything during the referendum campaign is just not backed up by the evidence.
As for the weakness of Labour under Corbyn allowing this all to take place, well that is just manifestly untrue. Cameron was able to call the referendum because of Miliband losing in 2015. May (and now Boris) have been prevented from implementing it because of what Labour did in 2017 (which allowed small numbers of rebel Tories to block their own government).
Finally people (especially in here) do not usually blindly defend Corbyn; what they usually try to do is point out that a lot of what is said about him (such as your post above) is just wrong.
Put it on a new thread with a vote 'Did Corbyn enthusiastically campaign for remain?' and we'll see what the average person thought. From what I heard coming directly out of his mouth I would place a big fat no in the box.
I didn't say about Corbyn causing the referendum. I said everything since is directly related to that moment he was happy to sit on the fence to a) not alienate leavers or b) because he was secretly happy that the UK leaves the EU.
Put it on a new thread with a vote 'Did Corbyn enthusiastically campaign for remain?' and we'll see what the average person thought. From what I heard coming directly out of his mouth I would place a big fat no in the box.
I didn't say about Corbyn causing the referendum. I said everything since is directly related to that moment he was happy to sit on the fence to a) not alienate leavers or b) because he was secretly happy that the UK leaves the EU.
lol
I bet if you asked the average person what they thought about Corbyn, you’d quickly find that most of it was slurs and fibs from the papers (who have spent the last four years going after him).
Ironically you’d see much the same sort of phenomenon of people repeating what the papers said if you asked the average person what they thought of the EU.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.